![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
#10
| |||
| |||
|
|
In the early days of the relational model, the words *intention* and "extension* were used respectively to mean *query* and *response*. That is, an SQL (or other database language) query represented your *intention*, that which defined what you wanted to retrieve. What the RDBMS delivered to you was the corresponding *extension*. (Kind of like the definition of something and the thing itself.) Is this usage (query = intention, response = extension) used today? If not, what are the common terms used for query and response, and how are the terms *intention* and *extension* used now? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |